| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Aad, G, et al.
(author)
-
- 2015
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Mishra, A, et al.
(author)
-
Diminishing benefits of urban living for children and adolescents' growth and development
- 2023
-
In: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1476-4687 .- 0028-0836. ; 615:7954, s. 874-883
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Optimal growth and development in childhood and adolescence is crucial for lifelong health and well-being1–6. Here we used data from 2,325 population-based studies, with measurements of height and weight from 71 million participants, to report the height and body-mass index (BMI) of children and adolescents aged 5–19 years on the basis of rural and urban place of residence in 200 countries and territories from 1990 to 2020. In 1990, children and adolescents residing in cities were taller than their rural counterparts in all but a few high-income countries. By 2020, the urban height advantage became smaller in most countries, and in many high-income western countries it reversed into a small urban-based disadvantage. The exception was for boys in most countries in sub-Saharan Africa and in some countries in Oceania, south Asia and the region of central Asia, Middle East and north Africa. In these countries, successive cohorts of boys from rural places either did not gain height or possibly became shorter, and hence fell further behind their urban peers. The difference between the age-standardized mean BMI of children in urban and rural areas was <1.1 kg m–2 in the vast majority of countries. Within this small range, BMI increased slightly more in cities than in rural areas, except in south Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and some countries in central and eastern Europe. Our results show that in much of the world, the growth and developmental advantages of living in cities have diminished in the twenty-first century, whereas in much of sub-Saharan Africa they have amplified.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- Gerkin, RC, et al.
(author)
-
The best COVID-19 predictor is recent smell loss: a cross-sectional study
- 2020
-
In: medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences. - : Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- BackgroundCOVID-19 has heterogeneous manifestations, though one of the most common symptoms is a sudden loss of smell (anosmia or hyposmia). We investigated whether olfactory loss is a reliable predictor of COVID-19.MethodsThis preregistered, cross-sectional study used a crowdsourced questionnaire in 23 languages to assess symptoms in individuals self-reporting recent respiratory illness. We quantified changes in chemosensory abilities during the course of the respiratory illness using 0-100 visual analog scales (VAS) for participants reporting a positive (C19+; n=4148) or negative (C19-; n=546) COVID-19 laboratory test outcome. Logistic regression models identified singular and cumulative predictors of COVID-19 status and post-COVID-19 olfactory recovery.ResultsBoth C19+ and C19-groups exhibited smell loss, but it was significantly larger in C19+ participants (mean±SD, C19+: -82.5±27.2 points; C19-: -59.8±37.7). Smell loss during illness was the best predictor of COVID-19 in both single and cumulative feature models (ROC AUC=0.72), with additional features providing negligible model improvement. VAS ratings of smell loss were more predictive than binary chemosensory yes/no-questions or other cardinal symptoms, such as fever or cough. Olfactory recovery within 40 days was reported for ∼50% of participants and was best predicted by time since illness onset.ConclusionsAs smell loss is the best predictor of COVID-19, we developed the ODoR-19 tool, a 0-10 scale to screen for recent olfactory loss. Numeric ratings ≤2 indicate high odds of symptomatic COVID-19 (4<OR<10), which can be deployed when viral lab tests are impractical or unavailable.
|
|
| 20. |
- Kilpelainen, TO, et al.
(author)
-
Multi-ancestry study of blood lipid levels identifies four loci interacting with physical activity
- 2019
-
In: Nature communications. - London : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 10:1, s. 376-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Many genetic loci affect circulating lipid levels, but it remains unknown whether lifestyle factors, such as physical activity, modify these genetic effects. To identify lipid loci interacting with physical activity, we performed genome-wide analyses of circulating HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and triglyceride levels in up to 120,979 individuals of European, African, Asian, Hispanic, and Brazilian ancestry, with follow-up of suggestive associations in an additional 131,012 individuals. We find four loci, in/near CLASP1, LHX1, SNTA1, and CNTNAP2, that are associated with circulating lipid levels through interaction with physical activity; higher levels of physical activity enhance the HDL cholesterol-increasing effects of the CLASP1, LHX1, and SNTA1 loci and attenuate the LDL cholesterol-increasing effect of the CNTNAP2 locus. The CLASP1, LHX1, and SNTA1 regions harbor genes linked to muscle function and lipid metabolism. Our results elucidate the role of physical activity interactions in the genetic contribution to blood lipid levels.
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- Pelaz, B, et al.
(author)
-
Diverse Applications of Nanomedicine
- 2017
-
In: ACS nano. - : American Chemical Society (ACS). - 1936-086X .- 1936-0851. ; 11:3, s. 2313-2381
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
|
|
| 28. |
- Thomas, HS, et al.
(author)
-
- 2019
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 29. |
|
|
| 30. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 31. |
|
|
| 32. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(author)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 33. |
|
|
| 34. |
|
|
| 35. |
|
|
| 36. |
|
|
| 37. |
|
|
| 38. |
|
|
| 39. |
|
|
| 40. |
|
|
| 41. |
|
|
| 42. |
|
|
| 43. |
|
|
| 44. |
|
|
| 45. |
|
|
| 46. |
|
|
| 47. |
|
|
| 48. |
- Glasbey, JC, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 49. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 50. |
- Chen, H, et al.
(author)
-
Folic Acid Supplementation Mitigates Alzheimer's Disease by Reducing Inflammation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- 2016
-
In: Mediators of inflammation. - : Hindawi Limited. - 1466-1861 .- 0962-9351. ; 2016, s. 5912146-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background/Aims. Low serum folate levels can alter inflammatory reactions. Both phenomena have been linked to Alzheimer’s disease (AD), but the effect of folic acid on AD itself is unclear. We quantified folate supplementation’s effect on inflammation and cognitive function in patients with AD over the course of 6 months.Methods. Patients newly diagnosed with AD (age > 60 years;n=121; mild to severe; international criteria) and being treated with donepezil were randomly assigned into two groups with (intervention group) or without (control group) supplemental treatment with folic acid (1.25 mg/d) for 6 months. The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was administered to all patients at baseline and follow-up, and blood samples were taken before and after treatment. We quantified serum folate, amyloid beta (Aβ), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factorα(TNFα), plasma homocysteine (Hcy), S-adenosylmethionine (SAM), S-adenosylhomocysteine (SAH), and the mRNA levels of presenilin (PS), IL-6, and TNFαin leukocytes. Data were analyzed using a repeated-measures mixed model.Results. The mean MMSE was slightly increased in the intervention group compared to that in the control group (P<0.05). Posttreatment, plasma SAM and SAM/SAH levels were significantly higher (P<0.05), while Aβ40, PS1-mRNA, and TNFα-mRNA levels were lower in the intervention group than in the control group (P<0.05). The Aβ42/Aβ40ratio was also higher in the intervention group (P<0.05).Conclusions. Folic acid is beneficial in patients with AD. Inflammation may play an important role in the interaction between folic acid and AD. This trial is registered with clinical trial registration numberChiCTR-TRC-13003246.
|
|
